Letters to the Editor
Not just another depressive
Dear Editor,
Barcroft Boake has suddenly become trendy, with a fictionalised (shudder) account of his life (Where the Dead Men Lie, by Hugh Capel) just published, as well as a Collected Works, Edited, With a Life, the review of which by Patrick Buckridge (July–August 2008) suggests that the old misconceptions about the poet, based on a biased account by A.G. Stephens, on which Clement Semmler based his biography, are in danger of achieving the status of fact.
Boake had a lot to be sad about. His much-loved mother died when he was thirteen; he had been apprenticed to a bankrupt who conned him out of a large inheritance; an employer neglected to pay him; and a couple of love affairs went bust. But to write him off as a depressive, with death his ‘single theme’, is to fly in the face of the reality I discovered when researching the biography that won the Walter Stone Award in 1986.
... (read more)Patrick Allington replies to John Carmody
Dear Editor,
I sort of but don’t exactly agree with John Carmody, who sort of but didn’t exactly agree with my mixed review of Tony Jones’s edition of The Best Australian Political Writing (May 2008). Carmody suggests that the anthology should have been called ‘Best Political Journalism’ because it ‘completely lacks’ academic writing or reflective essays. I agree that the book was journalism-heavy, but there’s nothing to be gained by overstatement. It also included a number of longer essays, the best of which were intelligent, learned, thought-provoking and impassioned.
... (read more)Patrick Allington (May 2008) astutely discerned an essential characteristic – I consider it a flaw – of The Best Australian Political Writing 2008, which was edited by Tony Jones of the ABC. He did not quite nail it down, however: I think that the book would have been better described as the ‘best’ political journalism because that, overwhelmingly, is what it really is (furthermore, it is exclusively print journalism). It completely lacks academic, or what one might term ‘reflective’, writing. That is part of the reason why, as Allington correctly insisted, some of the pieces are dated and, indeed, remain rather flat on the page.
... (read more)Lifting the flap
Dear Editor,
I had always believed that the only thing worse than a bad review was not to be reviewed at all, to be ignored. Now I find that there is something even more galling: to be reviewed by someone who is more concerned to air his and other peo ...
Defending Darleen Bungey
... (read more)Dear Editor,
To write the biography of an artist as prolific and complex as Arthur Boyd is an ambitious undertaking, as Ian Britain notes in his review of Darleen Bungey’s account (February 2008). Her book took seven years to research and write; it underwent considerable peer review.
As its commissioning editor, I was delighted by Bungey’s highly original, imaginative and evocative prose. If Britain prefers, as he states, ‘the austerities of Franz Philipp’s seminal study ... Janet McKenzie’s beautifully economical monograph ... the poised, elegant restraint of Brenda Niall’, then he is so patently lacking in sympathy with this endeavour that he is unlikely to be fair to its author. And he isn’t.
Calling for a revolution in higher education
Dear Editor,
In his victory speech on 24 November 2007, Kevin Rudd reaffirmed education as a key priority for the future of this country. We believe that a true education revolution must include a new wave of higher education reform - reform that will redress the imbalances that have characterised the sector of the last decade or more. Such reform should redirect resources back into the core university activities of teaching and research. We urge immediate attention and commitment to the following:
... (read more)Dogs’ tails and other trivia
Dear Editor,
I am grateful to Daniel Thomas for pointing out errors and inconsistencies where they exist in my book Australian Pastoral: The making of a white landscape (November 2007). In a work of 90,000 words and 600 footnotes, there will inevitably be some errors. However, most of what Thomas says are errors are not. My reference to ‘Lady Jane Franklin’ follows the Australian Dictionary of Biography. ‘Walter Baldwin Spencer’, although often called Baldwin Spencer, follows his biographers and the ADB. ‘James Stuart Macdonald’ is referred to thus in the first reference and then as ‘James Macdonald’ or ‘J.S. Macdonald’. All are correct and hardly hanging offences, but Thomas, who has known me for more than twenty years, spells my own name in two different ways, one wrongly, in his review. ‘Claude Lorraine’ is not a spelling mistake but accepted usage (The Oxford Companion to Art).
... (read more)Lifelong love of books
Dear Editor,
Ruth Starke’s review of my book Stories, Picture and Reality: Two Children Tell (October 2007) is a competent, even enthusiastic, summary of the book’s main points, with emphasis on its uniqueness (starting with infants and books, and including siblings). She notes that no other male child has been studied in this way.
... (read more)Real what?
Dear Editor,
I have followed with interest the dispute between John Carmody and James Ley that proceeded the latter’s exceptionally sensible and even-handed review (March 2007) in which Mr Ley criticised those who maintain the divide between high and popular culture.
... (read more)Dear Editor,
Brian Matthews makes an eloquent defence of Manning Clark’s Kristallnacht fantasy, but I was surprised to find myself being drafted as a witness simply because I once said that autobiography is ‘a lying art’ (May 2007). Actually, I can’t remember ever having used quite those words, but, as Brian Matthews well argues, memory plays tricks.
... (read more)